Sufia v. Khalique
| Decision Date | 23 December 2020 |
| Docket Number | 2019–06949,Index No.10692/15 |
| Citation | 189 A.D.3d 1499,138 N.Y.S.3d 116 |
| Parties | Begum SUFIA, Respondent, v. Abdul KHALIQUE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
189 A.D.3d 1499
138 N.Y.S.3d 116
Begum SUFIA, Respondent,
v.
Abdul KHALIQUE, Appellant.
2019–06949
Index No.10692/15
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Submitted—March 12, 2020
December 23, 2020
Hegge & Confusione, LLC, New York, N.Y. (Michael Confusione of counsel), for appellant.
The Sklavos Law Group, P.C., Jericho, N.Y. (Alexander E. Sklavos of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, JEFFREY A. COHEN, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, in effect, for the equitable distribution of marital property following a foreign judgment of divorce, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Margaret P. McGowan, J.), entered October 14, 2020. The judgment, upon a decision of the same court dated April 8, 2019, made after a nonjury trial, inter alia, directed the defendant to pay child support in the sum of $1,608.71 per month, awarded the plaintiff maintenance in the sum of $1,786.99 per month for a period of 14 years, to increase to the sum of $3,004.59 per month upon the emancipation of the parties' youngest child, equitably distributed
the marital property, and awarded the plaintiff counsel fees in the sum of $25,000.
ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal from the decision is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5520[c] ); and it is further,
ORDERED that the judgment is modified, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by deleting the provision thereof awarding the plaintiff maintenance in the sum of $1,786.99 per month for a period of 14 years, to increase to the sum of $3,004.59 per month upon the emancipation of the parties' youngest child, and substituting therefor a provision awarding the plaintiff maintenance in the sum of $1,786.99 per month for a period of 14 years, with such maintenance obligation terminating upon the death of either party or upon the plaintiff's remarriage; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The parties were married in Bangladesh in 1987, moved to the United States in 1994, and have four children, one of whom was unemancipated at the time of the trial in this action. In September 2015, the plaintiff commenced this action for a divorce and ancillary relief. In an order dated March 23, 2016, the Supreme Court, inter alia, found that the defendant had obtained a default judgment of divorce against the plaintiff in Bangladesh on June 30, 2015, and set the matter down for a trial regarding the issues of child support, maintenance, and equitable distribution. After a two-day nonjury trial, the court issued a decision dated April 8, 2019, equitably distributing the marital property, directing the defendant to pay the sum of
$1,608.71 per month in child support, awarding the plaintiff maintenance in the sum of $1,786.99 per month for a period of 14 years, to increase to the sum of $3,004.59 per month upon the emancipation of the parties' youngest child, and awarding the plaintiff counsel fees in the sum of $25,000. A judgment of divorce was entered upon the decision on October 14, 2020. The defendant appeals.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the plaintiff was not barred from litigating the issues of maintenance, equitable distribution, and counsel fees in this action (see Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][2][a], [5][a] ; Young v. Knight, 236 A.D.2d 534, 653 N.Y.S.2d 673 ; Nikrooz v. Nikrooz, 167 A.D.2d 334, 335, 561 N.Y.S.2d 301 ; Mahoney v. Mahoney, 131 A.D.2d 822, 822–823, 517 N.Y.S.2d 184 ).
" ‘ Domestic Relations Law § 236 mandates that the equitable distribution of marital assets be based on the circumstances of the particular case and directs the courts to consider a number of statutory factors’ " ( Fairchild v. Fairchild, 149 A.D.3d 810, 810–811, 51 N.Y.S.3d 613, quoting Fields v. Fields, 15 N.Y.3d 158, 170, 905 N.Y.S.2d 783, 931 N.E.2d 1039 ; see Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][5][c], [d] ). While " ‘the Supreme Court is required to discuss the statutory factors it relied upon in distributing marital property,’ .... [w]here ‘it is evident that the Supreme Court considered ll relevant factors and the reasons for its decision are articulated, the court is not required to specifically cite to and analyze each statutory factor’ " ( Spera v. Spera, 71 A.D.3d 661, 662, 898 N.Y.S.2d 548, quoting Milnes v. Milnes, 50 A.D.3d 750, 750, 857 N.Y.S.2d 168 [citations omitted]...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ford v. Ford
...exercised its discretion in awarding the plaintiff, the less monied spouse, counsel fees in the sum of $50,000 (see Sufia v. Khalique, 189 A.D.3d 1499, 1502, 138 N.Y.S.3d 116 ; Lindo v. Lindo, 185 A.D.3d 914, 915, 128 N.Y.S.3d 636 ).The remaining contentions of the parties and the law firm ......
-
Silvers v. Silvers
...of the credibility of witnesses and the proffered items of evidence is afforded great weight on appeal" ( id. ; see Sufia v. Khalique, 189 A.D.3d 1499, 1500, 138 N.Y.S.3d 116 ; Taylor v. Taylor, 140 A.D.3d 944, 946, 34 N.Y.S.3d 127 ). Equitable distribution of marital property does not nece......
-
Silvers v. Silvers
... ... witnesses and the proffered items of evidence is afforded ... great weight on appeal" (id.; see Sufia v ... Khalique, 189 A.D.3d 1499, 1500; Taylor v ... Taylor, 140 A.D.3d 944, 946) ... Equitable ... distribution of ... ...
-
Koutsouras v. Mitsos-Koutsouras
...that ‘[t]here shall be a rebuttable presumption that counsel fees shall be awarded to the less monied spouse’ " ( Sufia v. Khalique, 189 A.D.3d 1499, 1502, 138 N.Y.S.3d 116 ). " ‘An award of counsel fees pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 237(a) is entrusted to the sound discretion of the......